PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
176.45 - 178.59
86.62 - 184.48
124.91M / 173.95M (Avg.)
50.81 | 3.50
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
16.78%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AMD's 3.32%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
15.87%
Positive gross profit growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
17.31%
Positive EBIT growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
17.31%
Positive operating income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
16.33%
Net income growth at 50-75% of AMD's 22.99%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
16.18%
EPS growth at 50-75% of AMD's 22.73%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
16.42%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of AMD's 22.73%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
-0.18%
Share reduction while AMD is at 0.19%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.30%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.22%
Dividend reduction while AMD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
21.67%
OCF growth under 50% of AMD's 114.16%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
24.45%
FCF growth under 50% of AMD's 137.83%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
2457.03%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 291.07%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
1057.66%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 187.73%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
403.10%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 16.97%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
7201.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 1762.05%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
968.99%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 498.63%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
1082.05%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 93.14%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
9870.55%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 330.94% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
2036.19%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 301.76%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
698.24%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 94.48%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
1299.84%
Below 50% of AMD's 20384.37%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
484.46%
Below 50% of AMD's 1205.86%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
182.07%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 7.82%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
374.95%
Dividend/share CAGR of 374.95% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
151.21%
Dividend/share CAGR of 151.21% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
149.56%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 149.56% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
25.20%
Our AR growth while AMD is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
14.67%
Inventory growth well above AMD's 4.07%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
12.66%
Asset growth above 1.5x AMD's 4.57%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
13.52%
BV/share growth above 1.5x AMD's 2.89%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
2.10%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
9.71%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. AMD's 9.61%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
6.53%
SG&A growth well above AMD's 11.85%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.